Coronavirus Pandemic

Was listening to sports talk radio here in Nashville and reporter stated all but 2 or 3 of the UT bball players have had coronavirus. Any idea how many of our players have already been infected?
 
        Reply
  • Like
Reactions: Goode-for-3
Was listening to sports talk radio here in Nashville and reporter stated all but 2 or 3 of the UT bball players have had coronavirus. Any idea how many of our players have already been infected?
Assuming that a previous infection gives you immunity it is actually a benefit to have already had it before the season gets underway.
 
        Reply
  • Like
Reactions: Goode-for-3
Chicago, IL
Assuming that a previous infection gives you immunity it is actually a benefit to have already had it before the season gets underway.
There's no evidence that it does provide immunity though. Not the way other diseases do. Screenshot taken from the University of Maryland.

 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20201123-075019_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20201123-075019_Chrome.jpg
    868.2 KB · Views: 14
        Reply
  • Like
Reactions: KevinC
Baltimore, MD
There's no evidence that it does provide immunity though. Not the way other diseases do. Screenshot taken from the University of Maryland.

My parents both had it back in August with mild symptoms. My mom tested positive again about 2 weeks ago and because it had been 94 days (4 days past some seemingly arbitrary 90 day timeframe), it was treated as a second case and she was told to quarantine a second time and forced to miss work. She had no symptoms this time around (though I know people can transmit without presenting symptoms). I wish there would have been some kind of transparency regarding the second positive test, like what's the "viral load" to trigger a positive test, was it lower than her "viral load" the first time? Is there even a threshold for that for people who tested positive before? I'm not too educated on how these tests work.

I'm all for taking this seriously, but there's still so much we don't know about it and so much that's hard to account for. Just don't assume that people won't test positive again just because they've had it once already as it seems to be an inexact science at this point.
 
Chicago, IL
My parents both had it back in August with mild symptoms. My mom tested positive again about 2 weeks ago and because it had been 94 days (4 days past some seemingly arbitrary 90 day timeframe), it was treated as a second case and she was told to quarantine a second time and forced to miss work. She had no symptoms this time around (though I know people can transmit without presenting symptoms). I wish there would have been some kind of transparency regarding the second positive test, like what's the "viral load" to trigger a positive test, was it lower than her "viral load" the first time? Is there even a threshold for that for people who tested positive before? I'm not too educated on how these tests work.

I'm all for taking this seriously, but there's still so much we don't know about it and so much that's hard to account for. Just don't assume that people won't test positive again just because they've had it once already as it seems to be an inexact science at this point.
I think we're on the same side here. I posted that to show that the idea of immunity after the fact is questionable because we don't know for certain.

Some people test positive for a long time, but there are also cases of people testing negative then positive again. Just because a team has it doesn't mean they'll be immune, as was suggested in the post I originally replied to.

More people are getting COVID-19 twice, suggesting immunity wanes quickly in some
 
Baltimore, MD
Yeah, we're on the same side. I was just giving a personal anecdote to show people that just because you've tested positive and had it once doesn't mean you're immune to (at least) testing positive again and having to quarantine a second time.
 
        Reply
  • Like
Reactions: Goode-for-3
My parents both had it back in August with mild symptoms. My mom tested positive again about 2 weeks ago and because it had been 94 days (4 days past some seemingly arbitrary 90 day timeframe), it was treated as a second case and she was told to quarantine a second time and forced to miss work. She had no symptoms this time around (though I know people can transmit without presenting symptoms). I wish there would have been some kind of transparency regarding the second positive test, like what's the "viral load" to trigger a positive test, was it lower than her "viral load" the first time? Is there even a threshold for that for people who tested positive before? I'm not too educated on how these tests work.

I'm all for taking this seriously, but there's still so much we don't know about it and so much that's hard to account for. Just don't assume that people won't test positive again just because they've had it once already as it seems to be an inexact science at this point.
The tests we have right now, at least none of the ones I've seen, have viral loads. Its a positive or negative. There are three types of tests we have right now:

1) PCR- basically it detects viral DNA. Theoretically we could figure out viral titers with this, but with a nasopharyngeal swab... but it would probably be a useless number. Viral titers are useful for blood stream infections (like HIV, HCV) but not so much for airway infections.

2) ELISA- Testing for viral proteins directly

The two above test for active (or "recent" infections. 90 days might be a relatively arbitrary time frame, but it could also be based on data that I haven't seen).

3) Antibody test- this is a test to see if you've developed an immune response. This does NOT necessarily mean you are immune. You probably are. But its not a gamble I would take at this stage.

94 days is a significant delay between positive tests, but it is seen. It could represent a second infection or it could represent residual viral particles from the prior infection. There have been a few proven 2nd infections, but its an arduous process to PROVE, and something thats only been done to add to the medical literature on the topic. But we have seen multiple cases of true 2nd infections in immunocompetent (healthy) people.

The unfortunate reality is that we know very, very little still. Even with all the gains we've made in the past year, each step we take is a totally new step forward.
 
        Reply
  • Like
Reactions: othawhitemeat and BMoreIllini